[ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
] Date Posted:08:51:57 03/13/17 MonIn reply to:
mrjames
's message, "Re: Princeton ND out west" on 06:32:26 03/13/17 Mon
I figure the two teams are fairly similar, considering that ND was in the running for a 3, 4 or 5 seed. They both rely heavily on the three-point shot and don't focus on a traditional inside game. So, like many college basketball games, this might devolve into a three-point shooting contest.

It's a two-by-two matrix. If ND hits from outside and Princeton doesn't, blow out. If both or neither hit, it will be a close game, but ND has the advantage. If Princeton is hot from outside and can defend the perimeter as well as they did in the league, we get the upset.

I guess that's one thing I don't like about the Golden State/Steph Curry direction that basketball in general is headed. It's become a three-point shooting contest and games devolve into a two-by-two matrix.[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]

Date Posted:11:01:46 03/13/17 Mon
Why don't you explain how slam dunk contests are great for the game? The beauty of the inside/outside game is in the passing, ball movement, spacing and flow. When the three occurs (especially the open three) it's because of the prep work.

The impressive part of the very complete Princeton offensive game this year is not the threes, but leading the country in fewest turnovers while having a high proportion of assists on their field goals.

Date Posted:11:24:48 03/13/17 Mon
Agree with everything you say, joisey. My point is that, after all that you describe about getting an good look, two well schooled and well prepared teams have worked hard to find the open man behind the arc. They've each succeeded, because they're that good.

Now they've got open guys taking excellent shots. Sometimes they go in, sometimes they don't. Sometimes open guys will shoot 50% from the arc, sometimes they will shoot 10%. That has nothing to do with how well scouted and well prepared they had to be get the open looks.

After all that, now you've got a three-point shooting contest. Prior to that, it was a strategic contest to see who could get the better shots, just as you describe.

Date Posted:11:06:32 03/22/17 Wed
Joisey, it gives me little satisfaction to say this as I was really rooting for Princeton to pull off the upset, but I think it's fair to conclude, "I told you so."

Your Tigers played very well, spreading the floor and moving the ball to the open man. They got great open shots. Indeed, at half time, TBS analyst Kenny Smith said that he thought Princeton could come back for the win because, "Notre Dame is getting good shots. Princeton is getting great shots."

Despite all of the Tigers' fine work to create excellent shots, Princeton just missed too many wide open looks from three.

I don't know what percentage Princeton shot from behind the arc, but it must have been about 25% or less. As I opined last week, Princeton got into a three-point shooting contest. Only the twist was that Princeton got into a three-point shooting contest with itself, and lost.

How fitting that Princeton ultimately lost on a missed open three-point shot.

Date Posted:14:53:05 03/22/17 Wed
Joisey, you read me correctly. Your paraphrase is on target: The Princeton strategy was great, but the execution was off.

Specifically, the execution was only off insofar as, having worked hard and effectively to create good shots from behind the arc, the Tigers simply missed way too many wide open looks.

That was my point, with the Princeton/Notre Dame/Golden State approach to reliance on three-point shots so much in vogue, sometimes two teams can be roughly equally effective in creating open shots. Then the game devolves into a three-point shooting contest, as guys either have the hot hand or, in Princeton's case, the cold one.

We tend to glorify Cornell's Sweet Sixteen run 2010 and of course it was a high water mark in recent League history. But the Big Red shot lights out from behind the arc. Those guys probably couldn't recreate that level of accuracy on a recurring basis since they shot well above their season average. Like I said, it was a three-point shooting contest and Cornell was in the preferred quadrant of the two-by-two matrix.

Date Posted:13:36:48 03/22/17 Wed
FWIW, my two cents is that Princeton's coach(s) out coached Notre Dame. Neither team shot the lights out. Either team could have won that game. Notre Dame had better players, but not by much. Princeton played better as a team.

Of even more interest, Princeton was 16-0 in the Ivies. Completely dominated the League, but couldn't beat a #5 Regional seed. What does that say about the overall strength of the Ivy basketball?

Date Posted:14:08:22 03/22/17 Wed
Regarding general strength of top teams, not too much. Yale (2016 v. Baylor) and Harvard (2014 v. Cincinnati) both won first round games as 12th versus 5th seeds, and neither was 16-0 during the regular season. Princeton shot below average for them. Three point reliance will do that to you.

Date Posted:14:32:53 03/22/17 Wed
You are right about the weakness of the bottom of the League. Unfortunately, in an eight team league, the bottom of the league consists of five teams. Penn finished fourth and lost twice to Dartmouth as well as having a losing overall record.

Three teams tied for last with 4-10 Ivy records and overall losing records (Cornell, Brown and Dartmouth). Columbia lost to Dartmouth and finished fifth with losing Ivy and overall records.

Date Posted:14:38:28 03/23/17 Thu
I am more than willing to offer my services as a mediator for a modest sum. Several dozen Pro V's or perhaps a bottle of Johnnie Blue. I am sure I can bring you all together after all we are all brothers here. My wife says that I am not argumentative at all, I only yell at the TV a couple of times a day. Plus I just got rid of all my frustrations by going to the indoor range and shooting off couple hundred rounds thru my new S&W Model 27, a very sweet revolverhttps://www.smith-wesson.com/firearms/model-27

Date Posted:20:53:12 03/22/17 Wed
I wouldn't lump Penn into that discussion. It finished No. 171 nationally and posted a Tier A win at UCF. While Brown, Cornell and Dartmouth all did finish Bottom 100, which is particularly weak for recent years, we're still talking about a league ranked in the teens nationally - as it has been for the entirety of this decade.

My initial model tends to believe that the bottom will be a bit stronger next year, while the top will get a lot stronger. I do fear that will become a trend if recent recruiting continues to follow the same trend.